Is Shaolin-Do for real?

[MasterKiller]

Originally Posted by Shaolin Wookie

I demonstrate the beginner material every time I help students learn it...LOL...but they're not visually impressive sets, so if I were to vid them and show them off, they'd be visually unimpressive. I imagine that's the reason they're not often "shown off". Then agian, I think "Tan Tui" is pretty visually unimpressive even in a Chinese "Master's" hands.

I dunno, this Tan Tui looks pretty good to me.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Wt83nvRwq-4

As for SD/Northern Shaolin---it is Northern Shaolin. I know this is a hard concept for people to grasp, Sd or not, but it is Northern Shaolin. Are they Northern Shaolin "Forms" as in---what you'll learn from a wushu competition or from a traditional Longfist DVD or whatever? No. But hte techniques are hte same. The movements are the same. The forms are just, well, not "aesthetically trimmed" quite the same or patterned on the same progression of footsteps. SD has its own unique method of teaching that material--some good innovations, some bad ones. You'll only ever know which is which if you try Northern Shaolin and Shaolin-Do.

I've studied Northern Shaolin with a Wushu coach--Longfist--long enough to learn 1 1/2 sets (just under a year), and I've been to a couple of schools claiming to teach Northern Shaolin. Only, SD doesn't teach Northern Shaolin the way Northern Shaolin is taught elsewhere. SD breaks it up, teaches how to throw some heavy duty punches, some sanshou sweeps, etc., and does more conditioning early on. So yeah, it's karatified because it's based on kicking ass. I'm not dissing Northern Shaolin, but ****, no school I went to had a heavy bag in the building and the workouts were paced for geriatrics. SD doesn't do "Tan Tui" or such sets posture for posture, but I guarantee, from experience, that they're just about equivalent. While I do prefer the polish and such of Northern Shaolin to SD, and still I think the Short forms of SD are far superior in application.

You can call me biased, but I'm a pretty hardy critic of both. Honestly, the difference is this: if you want to be able to do the sets you see on kung fu DVD's or in the movies, you can learn those in NS. If you just want to be able to defend yourself using NS techniques, you can do that with SD. Granted, not all SD people can do this. But then, many NS practitioners are out of shape, poorly conditioned, and can't fight worth crap because the principles taught by "Chinese" methods are ****-poor methods for self-defense. SD has some ****-poor theories, too. It's like Ying-Yang, in a way. Most CMA I've seen is incredibly effiminate [Ying-Yang theory or not], and much of SD lacks a dose of reality.

But if you man up, dispense with dancing, and smack yourself across the cheek, you can learn some valuable stuff from either. Personally--and this is the reason I stuck with SD over Northern Shaolin--I think you'd have a better shot at "martial" artistry with SD.

Traditional Long Fist isn't wushu, wookie. Heck, it's not even pretty.

[Sal Canzonieri]

Northern "Shaolin" Wushu as in modern chinese government sanctioned wushu routines created by committee?

Umm, that's not Traditional Northern Shaolin, whatsoever, it's just nice sets to do at competitions.
Modern wushu is not used for self defense.

Like comparing apples and oranges.

[Northwind]

As a life-long Northern Shaolin practitioner, I gotta say wookie - that you have absolutely no idea what you're talking about when it comes to BSL/NS, etc. I am no fan of Shaolin-Do, however I won't try to go on about this or that of it, because by not being a practitioner, I don't have the right. Defending your system is fine and expected, but don't speak on what you don't know please.

[Tao Of The Fist]

Originally Posted by Northwind

As a life-long Northern Shaolin practitioner, I gotta say wookie - that you have absolutely no idea what you're talking about when it comes to BSL/NS, etc. I am no fan of Shaolin-Do, however I won't try to go on about this or that of it, because by not being a practitioner, I don't have the right. Defending your system is fine and expected, but don't speak on what you don't know please.

I don't think he means BSL necessarily, but northern styles altogether. I'm just assuming, I dont know what he actually meant, blah deh blah, etc.

[LaterthanNever]

"As for the whole nomenclature game: what's external and what's internal...that's only valuable if you read kung-fu books"

And you learned this from the Shaolin-Do people? Hmmm..


"There's punching, kicking, chin-na, wrestling, and meditation--which in China, stripped of its useless metaphysical theory [viz. useless when you're getting your ass kicked] is really just controlled breathing and self-control [viz. patience]."


And did you learn this from the SD folks as well?

"I think the internal/external thing is pretty ****ed r-tarded nowadays. You're either into meditation or you're into both meditation and fighting. I say that because conditioning is actually the strongest form of meditation, and assists in sitting meditation. Qigong without a good jab, cross, hook, or roundhouse is like a bullet without a gun. "

Either or thinking..yes. Very good. That's like saying any man who has sex must either be an adult film star or have erectile dysfunction. It's also like saying anyone who takes a sip of beer will become a falling down drunk/raging alcoholic, or anyone who has ever said the "F" word is an immoral degenerate but anyone who refuses to swear is automatically 100% ethical. I can see the SD folks taught you well.

Tell me, why don't the monks in the actual shaolin temple in China in the current day and age mention Sin Kwang The when kung fu sifus/masters I know travel there? Why don't they mention Chewbacca/wolfman either?

[Baqualin]

[QUOTE=Sal Canzonieri;968055]Oh, sorry, I made a mistake, it is not Painter that promotes 8 Animals Bagua, it is Jerry Alan Johnson, from the 1970s.
Here's some YouTube videos you can check out of his old lectures:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sFxdk_X1uIU
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OQ_Lj5p3iMA
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=o9802RoPeJM

There a lot more there too, you can find the links.
Check it out and let me know how it compares to the SD 8 Animals Bagua, I'm curious.

It doesn't....at all.
BQ

[Shaolin Wookie]

LOL...I love this webboard because it's comedy at its best. A real theater of the absurd.

Nothing is ever the "real" deal Longfist, and nothing is ever "the true way" to practice. There are always two standards. You go to the "soft style" or "Chinese" section in a tournament, hear thirty guys talking about how kung fu isn't pretty, --or even better, the judges do so---and then they engage in ballet and critique each other on the tilt of their pinkie fingers mid-backflip.

Oh, and I'm always wrong. That's probably true.

There's never a standard to hold things to except some dude on a Youtube clip or a guy with a successful DVD set, or maybe some Chinese guy in San Francisco who's the standard lineage bearer of "Magic Missile Mantis Fist", and the aesthetics of a set is always judged higher than anything else. Oh, and when you catch a glimpse of the "real deal", it's always somehow "ugly" or whatever. The "real" stuff is ugly.

Well, then, ****, you just admitted that every critique of an SD form proves it's the "real deal."

You know, it's kung fu deconstruction. Figures...a little Derrida, some Lao Tzu or Confucious thrown in the mix, and wham bam.....A standard of criticism that never asserts one fact except that all interpretation is misinterpretation. But wait, there's more: there are guys with hte correct interpretation. You know, the Derrida's of hte kung fu world, and other people are just ****ing up the transmission. The chicken laid the egg, and now people are ****ing the chickens and laying rotten eggs at an alarming rate---but it wasn't always so. See, there used to be a standard.....back in the mists of time, when truth was readily perceived and ninja wizards fought on the battlefield of the spiritual tiger....

This webboard is hilarious.

LOL...that I'm a defender of SD. These clowns don't even know who they're talking to. Read some more books, track down some more forms, and attain englightenment....LOL....yeaaaah.....

NEvermind me. I'm a troll. The worst kind, because I'm sincere.

[Shaolin Wookie]

Originally Posted by LaterthanNever

Tell me, why don't the monks in the actual shaolin temple in China in the current day and age mention Sin Kwang The when kung fu sifus/masters I know travel there? Why don't they mention Chewbacca/wolfman either?

Look at my avatar, genius. It's because Sin Kwang The' grew up in Indonesia, learning in a Chinese community in Bangdung, under the Central Plains Wushu school, which has no affiliation at all with Shaolin except for a stele bought and paid for by some students. And GGM Su Kong is likely a myth.

Good attack, wisely aimed. I see your teachers taught you well. You aimed for the nuts, but since you lacked an internal frame of reference, clawed fittingly at thin air.

If you really want to insult me, tell me my forms are beautiful. Then I'll know I'm a fake.

[Shaolin Wookie]

Originally Posted by MasterKiller

I dunno, this Tan Tui looks pretty good to me.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Wt83nvRwq-4



Traditional Long Fist isn't wushu, wookie. Heck, it's not even pretty.

Pretty/Ugly=Bad criteria for criticism.

Can you tell me, in all honesty, that one of those movements in the link above has ever assisted you in a fight? Have you ever blocked with an arm held out to the side, or placed your hand in front of you with the precision of that form, or thrown a kick with such postured elan?

No. I know. Tan Tui is basic because it teaches the basics, balance, and coordination. That's true. I agree. But then why does every practitioner leave it at that. It's a very rare sight to see anyone actually put some reality into their Tan Tui. ****ty Tan Tui leads to ****ty Longfist, leads to ****ty everything.

SD's Tan Tui sets--the infamous "Short Forms"--are sets of practical punches done without the "basics" of Tan Tui theory...which is.....well, rudimentary theory that really isn't that useful in the long run.

Didn't you quit Longfist for MMA? Why was that? Answer honestly.

[MasterKiller]

Originally Posted by Shaolin Wookie

You know, it's kung fu deconstruction. Figures...a little Derrida, some Lao Tzu or Confucious thrown in the mix, and wham bam.....A standard of criticism that never asserts one fact except that all interpretation is misinterpretation. But wait, there's more: there are guys with hte correct interpretation. You know, the Derrida's of hte kung fu world, and other people are just ****ing up the transmission. The chicken laid the egg, and now people are ****ing the chickens and laying rotten eggs at an alarming rate---but it wasn't always so. See, there used to be a standard.....back in the mists of time, when truth was readily perceived and ninja wizards fought on the battlefield of the spiritual tiger....

...anyone who reads deconstructive texts with an open mind is likely to be struck by the same phenomena that initially surprised me: the low level of philosophical argumentation, the deliberate obscurantism of the prose, the wildly exaggerated claims, and the constant striving to give the appearance of profundity by making claims that seem paradoxical, but under analysis often turn out to be silly or trivial.---Jon Searle

[Northwind]

Originally Posted by Shaolin Wookie

No. I know. Tan Tui is basic because it teaches the basics, balance, and coordination. That's true. I agree. But then why does every practitioner leave it at that. It's a very rare sight to see anyone actually put some reality into their Tan Tui. ****ty Tan Tui leads to ****ty Longfist, leads to ****ty everything.

Then you haven't seen our Tan Tui, the way it is taught, etc. Your experience does not equate to "every practitioner", unfortunately. And no, Tan Tui is not "basic".

[Shaolin Wookie]

Here are some points, and you're free to disagree:

1. Unless you can fight, your forms are just forms. You can practice applications, but unless you can fight, and you do so regularly, they're just forms.

2. Most people who are sincere fight. I'm not accusing MK or Sal of being wussies or anything. They do spar, practice, or fight competitively. I'm 99% sure they likely do so more than me.

3. Forms reinforce your ability to fight, and keep you limber, conditioned, and open your mind.

4. Once you can fight, you often forget that you don't need forms.

5. When you don't need forms, you're free to do something else. Which means, your forms aren't really that important. You could make forms up if you wanted to, unless you're interested in collecting fragments of human experience, like a martial historian.

6. Anything that teaches how to move at an opponent, cut angles, work for holds, kick with precision and force, punch with precision and force, will assist you in self defense. There are infinite variations of theory, but too much theory is r-tarded. I'll bet you that even a Chung Moo guy, if he sparred regularly, would claim it was his "fancy ball work" that really was the deciding factor in any victory--not the fact that he was sparring.

[B]7. Why do people leave kung fu for MMA? It's not because MMA has great forms and Longfist basics are the foundation of peerless fighting skills.[/B]

8. Why do people, myself included, stay in kung fu as their root style? Because it's more fun than BJJ, MMA training, or Chung Moo. But the Chung Moo sleepovers are great.

[Shaolin Wookie]

Reply if you want. I don't really care. I'm sincere about that. goodbye.

[Northwind]

Those are general statements that I would agree with, as they have nothing to do with the comments I disagreed with.

[MasterKiller]

Originally Posted by Shaolin Wookie

Pretty/Ugly=Bad criteria for criticism.

Can you tell me, in all honesty, that one of those movements in the link above has ever assisted you in a fight? Have you ever blocked with an arm held out to the side, or placed your hand in front of you with the precision of that form, or thrown a kick with such postured elan?

There are a few movements that I use regularly, but mostly during clinching or throwing. Kung fu postures are mostly throws and takedowns, when you get to the nuts and bolts of it. Anyone who tells you this is a strike doesn't understand their forms, imo...

No. I know. Tan Tui is basic because it teaches the basics, balance, and coordination. That's true. I agree. But then why does every practitioner leave it at that. It's a very rare sight to see anyone actually put some reality into their Tan Tui. ****ty Tan Tui leads to ****ty Longfist, leads to ****ty everything.

SD's Tan Tui sets--the infamous "Short Forms"--are sets of practical punches done without the "basics" of Tan Tui theory...which is.....well, rudimentary theory that really isn't that useful in the long run.

It's all about how you train it, and what your goals are. I imagine you guys do the same thing most long fist players do....learn Tan Tui because you have to, then move on to the more advanced material as soon as possible.

In general, most MMA fighters use about 8 hand strikes and 4 kicks. Fighting isn't complicated, even though it is.

Didn't you quit Longfist for MMA? Why was that? Answer honestly.

No, I didn't quit long fist. I learned everything my teacher had to offer and moved on. Quite simply, I took my long fist into MMA to make it work better.

I don't do my forms that much anymore. Just enough to not lose them. But I do revisit them, whenever I see an application or technique that fits them.

There is nothing wrong with traditional Chinese fighting techniques. There are some serious problems with traditional training methods, though.